Sup / garrison tech poll

Dorjan · Post by **Dorjan** » Thu Oct 16, 2008 9:52 am

a fig should be greater than an INT when the INT doesn't have sensor support, it's meant to be a defensive ship as stated in all descriptions.

People keep nerfing the INT because they are trying to make it less effective at attacking, when they are actually just making it worse. Lower their scan range ffs and raise their damage!

Adept · Post by **Adept** » Sat Oct 18, 2008 3:24 pm

CronoDroid wrote:QUOTE (CronoDroid @ Oct 16 2008, 06:43 AM) Ints should, assuming equal pilots, always, ALWAYS win in a dogfight.

Uh, why?

If things start out at knife fight range, then sure, but not always by any means. Dumbfire 3 / Seeker 3 / Minepack / SS 3 / Gat 3 adv fighter costs double to get than Heavy int with mini 3, and it should (and does) match the interceptor quite well.

I don't think there is a dogma that says INT must always be the superior fighting ship, except in the minds of some int whores.

gr4vity · Post by **gr4vity** » Sat Oct 18, 2008 6:16 pm

Just like to stress this out once more:

Moving SS2 to Sup will be quite a perk for Belters (at least in every game where you don't go Sup against them).

Dorjan · Post by **Dorjan** » Sat Oct 18, 2008 11:47 pm

the 3rd version of a weapon normally makes that biggest different though. So moving just the 3rd var would be good.

CronoDroid · Post by **CronoDroid** » Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:49 am

Because the idea of Sup is to not outwhore the enemy. They already get TP2, FBs, etc. which are much better endgame techs than HTTs. DF3 also makes them uber HTT/Bomber stoppers. In short, Figs have been getting size reductions, fuel perks, maybe ints could get something for a change.

Also, Level 2 tech should NOT BE MOVED. Full stop. Level 3 -> Adv Sup is fine. Moving Seeker2, SS2, etc. to Sup would, like grav said, be unbalancing.

takingarms1 · Post by **takingarms1** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 2:36 pm

Adept wrote:QUOTE (Adept @ Oct 18 2008, 11:24 AM) I don't think there is a dogma that says INT must always be the superior fighting ship, except in the minds of some int whores.

Yes there is. It's how allegiance was built and how most people see allegiance.

Int = king of dogfighting, for defensively holding territory or pushing cons
fig = attack ship, including killing bases
sf = killing miners

WhiskeyGhost · Post by **WhiskeyGhost** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 7:29 pm

TakingArms wrote:QUOTE (TakingArms @ Oct 21 2008, 09:36 AM) Yes there is. It's how allegiance was built and how most people see allegiance.

Int = king of dogfighting, for defensively holding territory or pushing cons
fig = attack ship, including killing bases
sf = killing miners

too bad that description isn't entirely accurate, since the Int does the other ships specialties better then they do, aside from maybe galving, but who needs galv when you can kill everyone in the sector, then camp a base and bomb/htt it?

takingarms1 · Post by **takingarms1** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 8:44 pm

bull@#(!

This is the most common misconception spouted by int-haters.

Ints do not kill miners better than sfs - sfs can go deeper into enemy territory and when gang-raping a miner they can out damage 1 or 2 nans easily with util2 and lrm2.

Ints do not kill bases better than sup. ha. Nor can they rip to a carrier cleverly positioned adjacent to the enemy's mining sector and wreak havoc.

You don't defeat ints by dogfighting them. You defeat them by out-playing them.

The major complaint against ints is when they boost into a sector to gang-rape your miners/cons. I acknowledge this is an issue, but a fuel nerf is probably enough to deal with it. Also I would suggest that figs are much better at killing miners/cons in a gang-rape situation than ints are, since figs have dfs and gatts which do more damage to util hulls.

sambasti · Post by **sambasti** » Wed Oct 22, 2008 4:30 am

Well, the point made by the people who say ints are better is that 5 ints can shred a 2 fig, 2 nan miner d, and subsequently kill anything coming from the base. Sfs are harder to set up, usually less coordinated, and killed by the 2 figs on miner d. If the sfs are well coordinated the miner is dead, but it is easier to say everyone in ints by the aleph and go, than everyone set up 3k from the miner. The setting up takes to long, since the miner is a moving target.

CronoDroid · Post by **CronoDroid** » Wed Oct 22, 2008 8:07 am

A lot of ints are much better at miner killing than a group of SFs, it is true (provided the miner has some heavy D on it) however SFs have the advantage of surprise. Ideally with Tac all the enemy miners should be dead around the same time the enemy realises you have SFs. SFs are also the best at killing all but one miner. It's much harder to defend four miners against Tac than it is against Exp, mainly because it only takes a few seconds for an undefended miner to die.

Galvs however are much better at killing small bases than int camping and bombing is, or ever will be. Not sure how that EVER became contentious.

PS: I think we've gotten way off-topic. If people really think Sup needs a perk, move Level 3 shields and missiles to Adv Sup.